Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Mitsubishi Motors R&D of America, Inc. |
|---|
Topics: Mitsubishi
|
Christopher J. Bonanti
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
August 24, 2012
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 165 (Friday, August 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51612-51614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20837]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Mitsubishi Motors R&D of America, Inc.
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Mitsubishi Motors R&D of
America, Inc.'s (Mitsubishi) petition for exemption of the Mitsubishi
[confidential] vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR part 543,
Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard. This petition is granted
because the agency has determined that the antitheft device to be
placed on the line as standard equipment is likely to be as effective
in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the
parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard 49 CFR part
541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard. Mitsubishi
requested [confidential] treatment for specific information in its
petition. The agency will address Mitsubishi's request for
[confidential] treatment by separate letter.
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2014 model year.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West
Building, W43-443, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Ms. Mazyck's phone number is (202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202)
493-2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated June 29, 2012,
Mitsubishi requested exemption from the parts-marking requirements of
the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the Mitsubishi
[confidential] vehicle line, beginning with MY 2014. The petition
requested an exemption from parts-marking pursuant to 49 CFR part 543,
Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, based on the
installation of an antitheft device as standard equipment for the
entire vehicle line.
Under Sec. 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant an
exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition,
Mitsubishi provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity,
design, and location of the components of the antitheft device for
[[Page 51613]]
the [confidential] vehicle line. Mitsubishi will install a passive,
transponder-based, electronic engine immobilizer device as standard
equipment on its [confidential] vehicle line beginning with MY 2014.
Mitsubishi stated that its entry models will be equipped with a
Wireless Control Module (WCM) immobilizer. Components of the WCM will
include a transponder key, key ring antenna and an electronic time and
alarm control system (ETACS). All other models will be equipped with a
One-touch Starting System (OSS) immobilizer. Components of the OSS
include the engine switch, keyless operation electronic control unit
(KOS ECU), OSS ECU and KOS key. Mitsubishi will not incorporate an
audible and visual alarm system on its vehicles. Mitsubishi's
submission is considered a complete petition as required by 49 CFR
543.7, in that it meets the general requirements contained in 543.5 and
the specific content requirements of 543.6.
Mitsubishi stated that the WCM is a keyless entry system in which
the transponder is embedded in a traditional key and inserted into the
key cylinder to activate the ignition and start the engine. All other
models of the [confidential] vehicle line are equipped with a OSS
system, which utilizes a keyless system that allows the driver to press
a button on the instrument panel to activate and deactivate the
ignition as long as the transponder is located in close proximity to
the driver. Mitsubishi also stated that the performance of the
immobilizer will be the same in all models whether the vehicle has a
WCM or OSS entry system. Mitsubishi further stated that the only
difference between the two devices will be the ``key'' (i.e.,
transponder key or keyless operation key) and the method used to
transmit the information to the immobilizer.
Mitsubishi stated that once the ignition switch is turned or pushed
to the ``ignition-on'' position, the transceiver module reads the
specific ignition key code for the vehicle and transmits an encrypted
message containing the key code to the electronic control unit (ECU).
The immobilizer receives the key code signal transmitted from either
type of key (WCM or OSS) and verifies that the key code signal is
correct. The immobilizer then sends a separate encrypted start-code
signal to the engine ECU to allow the driver to start the vehicle. The
engine only will function if the key code matches the unique
identification key code previously programmed into the ECU. If the
codes do not match, the engine and fuel systems will be disabled.
In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6,
Mitsubishi provided information on the reliability and durability of
its proposed device. To ensure reliability and durability of the
device, Mitsubishi conducted tests based on its own specified
standards. Mitsubishi provided a detailed list of the tests conducted
and believes that the device is reliable and durable since the device
complied with its specific requirements for each test. Mitsubishi
additionally stated that its immobilizer device is further enhanced by
several factors making it very difficult to defeat. Specifically,
Mitsubishi stated that communication between the transponder and the
ECU are encrypted. The WCM has over 4.3 billion and the OSS has over
250 million different possible key codes that make successful key code
duplication virtually impossible. Mitsubishi also stated that its
immobilizer system and the ECU share security data during vehicle
assembly that make them a matched set. These matched modules will not
function if taken out and reinstalled separately on other vehicles.
Mitsubishi also stated that it is impossible to mechanically override
the system and start the vehicle because the vehicle will not be able
to start without the transmission of the specific code to the
electronic control module. Lastly, Mitsubishi stated that the antitheft
device is extremely reliable and durable because there are no moving
parts, nor does the key require a separate battery.
Mitsubishi informed the agency that its Eclipse vehicle line has
been equipped with the device since introduction of its MY 2000
vehicles. Mitsubishi stated that the theft rate for the MY 2000 Eclipse
decreased by almost 42% when compared with that of its MY 1999
Mitsubishi Eclipse (unequipped with an immobilizer device). Mitsubishi
also revealed that the Eclipse, Galant, Endeavor, Outlander, Lancer,
Outlander Sport and i-MiEV vehicle lines have been equipped with a
similar type of immobilizer device since January 2000, January 2004,
April 2004, September 2006, March 2007, September 2010 and October 2011
respectively. The Mitsubishi Eclipse, Galant, Endeavor, Outlander and
Lancer vehicle lines have all been granted parts-marking exemptions by
the agency and the average theft rates using 3 MY's data are 1.7356,
4.8973, 1.1619, 0.3341 and 1.0871 respectively. Theft rate data for the
Outlander Sport and i-MiEV are not available. Therefore, Mitsubishi has
concluded that the antitheft device proposed for its vehicle line is no
less effective than those devices in the lines for which NHTSA has
already granted full exemption from the parts-marking requirements.
Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Mitsubishi on the
device, the agency believes that the antitheft device for the
[confidential] vehicle line is likely to be as effective in reducing
and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). The
agency concludes that the device will provide four of the five types of
performance listed in Sec. 543.6(a)(3): promoting activation;
preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by unauthorized
persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants;
and ensuring the reliability and durability of the device.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of Part
541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of Part 541. The agency
finds that Mitsubishi has provided adequate reasons for its belief that
the antitheft device for the Mitsubishi [confidential] vehicle line is
likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft
as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). This conclusion is based on the
information Mitsubishi provided about its device.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full
Mitsubishi's petition for exemption for the [confidential] vehicle line
from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541, beginning with
the 2014 model year vehicles. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541,
Appendix A-1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft
Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains
publication requirements incident to the disposition of all Part 543
petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product
nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is granted
and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary in order
to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from
the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
Mitsubishi will provide the agency with notification of the nameplate
and model year of the vehicle
[[Page 51614]]
line for which [confidential] treatment has been requested prior to
introduction of the vehicle line.
If Mitsubishi decides not to use the exemption for this line, it
must formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line
must be fully marked as required by 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of
major component parts and replacement parts).
NHTSA notes that if Mitsubishi wishes in the future to modify the
device on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit
a petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a Part
543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted
under this part and equipped with the antitheft device on which the
line's exemption is based. Further, Sec. 543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that Part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend Part 543 to require the submission of a
modification petition for every change to the components or design of
an antitheft device. The significance of many such changes could be de
minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the manufacturer
contemplates making any changes, the effects of which might be
characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency before
preparing and submitting a petition to modify.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.
Issued on: August 20, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-20837 Filed 8-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P